An official with the Internal Revenue Service has admitted that legal opponents of former President Bill Clinton were singled out for tax audits, according to court documents made public this week. "What do you expect when you sue the president?" senior IRS official Paul Breslan told Judicial Watch, the Washington-based legal watchdog group that had filed 50-plus legal actions against the Clinton administration and subsequently found itself in the IRS's cross hairs.

Breslan's quote is cited in Judicial Watch's complaint against the tax agency, based on a host of what look to be politically inspired audits that make the worst abuses of the Nixon administration appear puny by comparison.

"There were literally six witnesses in the room when Breslan told us we should have expected an audit," Judicial Watch Chairman Larry Klayman revealed to NewsMax.com. "Four of them were lawyers."

The legal group became the target of an IRS audit in 1998, just four days after it filed an independent impeachment report against Clinton, based on years of investigation into everything from Chinagate to the Paula Jones case.

But Judicial Watch wasn't alone. Witnesses bearing damaging testimony against the president were a favorite target of the Clinton IRS. Those singled out for audits include:

Leak

The Jones case, which would eventually lead to Clinton's impeachment, was of particular interest to the IRS, which apparently leaked her confidential tax returns to the late New York Daily News reporter Lars Erik Nelson.

In a September 1997 column Nelson revealed details from Jones' filing to bolster claims that she was profiting from her sexual harassment lawsuit against Clinton.

In a subsequent interview with NewsMax.com's Carl Limbacher (then with the Washington Weekly), Nelson insisted somewhat implausibly that a "friend" of Jones had come across her tax return during a visit to her home and decided to go public with the secrets.

Quite an Enemies List

As the Judicial Watch complaint notes, the Clinton IRS also went after organizations and even media companies it perceived as politically hostile, including:

The National Rifle Association, The Heritage Foundation, The National Review, The American Spectator, Freedom Alliance, National Center for Public Policy Research, American Policy Center, American Cause, Citizens Against Government Waste, Citizens for Honest Government, Progress and Freedom Foundation, Concerned Women for America and the San Diego Chapter of Christian Coalition.

Fox News Channel analyst Bill O'Reilly, a frequent critic of Bill and Hillary Clinton, has also pointed out how the IRS has repeatedly audited him.

The political nature of the Judicial Watch's audit seems particularly blatant.

"The IRS asked for our political affiliations in the first notice of audit," Klayman told NewsMax.

When he questioned why auditors wanted to know about the group's political ties, an IRS district director said the information had been deemed "relevant."

Worse still, each time Judicial Watch seemed to make legal headway against the White House, the IRS ratcheted up the pressure.

"When we would accomplish something big, like the criminal finding by Judge Royce Lamberth against Clinton in the Kathleen Willey Privacy Act case, our lawyers would get a call saying, 'We just want you to know that Judicial Watch is still on the IRS's radar screen,'" Klayman said.

"The same thing happened when we revealed the White House e-mail scandal," he added.

Shockingly, the IRS's intimidation tactics continue into the Bush administration, which has failed to sack Clinton's IRS Commissioner Charles Rosotti.

After Judicial Watch won the release of thousands of pages of documents from Vice President Dick Cheney's Energy Task Force last month, a badge-wearing IRS agent showed up at the group's offices.

A personal meeting between Klayman and Bush Justice Department Criminal Division chief Michael Chertoff, who led the Senate investigation into the Clintons' Whitewater abuses, failed to yield any interest in pursuing IRS abuses, which now threaten to tarnish the Bush administration.

When noted columnist Robert Novak inquired of the Justice Department about Judicial Watch's IRS complaint, he was told by a department official, "I don't know what we are going to do with this Klayman."

"When we were told that we were being audited because we sued Bill Clinton, we had no choice but to stand up and fight in court," Klayman said. "By leaving Charles Rossotti as IRS commissioner, Bush obviously is sending a signal that political audits are fine with him."

Oh, that's right. BeAChooser was unwittingly aiding and abetting the cover-up of the Ron Brown suicide.

You are rude not to ping me when you say something about me ... especially when what you say it is simply untrue. And since I didn't get a chance to respond to your last remark to me on the previous thread (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/668451/posts?), I will now. You wrote:

I haven't said that Mr. Klayman called it suicide. I said that I called it suicide.

At least we now have it established that you are the one claiming this. When you entered that thread by asking "What is Judicial Watch's latest version of the truth regarding Ron Brown's suicide" and "Even Klayman gave up on the murder theory", I'm sure I was not alone in thinking that you were claiming that JW was suggesting it was no longer a murder but a suicide. Glad to see you finally cleared up what appeared to be a dishonest allegation.

Now, perhaps you can do something besides avoid my SIMPLE questions to you about YOUR theory that it was a suicide. I asked you just a couple to make it easy for you. For example, why did the AFIP management LIE about the nature of the wound and their staff's opinions if it was a suicide? You seem to accept the contention that the evidence suggests there might be a bullet in Brown's head. So why was there no autopsy? Why would the Whitehouse order that no autopsy be done in the case of an "apparent" suicide? Surely they wouldn't hide a "suicide" from the Brown family?

And just how did Brown, if he crashed the plane, manage to do it with a bullet in his head? The plane went off course minutes before the crash. Did Brown seize control of the aircraft at that point and if so, how come the 34 other people on the plane didn't manage to wrest it back from him. Don't you think 34 ARMED people could have done that? Why not? And how did Brown, after occupying the cockpit to crash the plane (with a bullet in his head?) manage to get back to his seat so that his body could be found in a location that would suggest he was seated during the crash?

You government disrupters are getting desperate if you want to spin Brown's death as a suicide. But go ahead and try. You might motivate an autopsy.

Catch-22 Howlin, I have never claimed to be a beacon of objectivity. I am well aware that I am not the most objective person in the world when it comes to Judicial Watch, but know that I am fair to Larry Klayman and willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, amidst the utter demagoguery, ad hominem attacks, and blatant mud-slinging on his integrity and person.

To say "What do you expect" is just unacceptable! We expect that the President of the United States would not be allowed to use the IRS against someone who disagreed with his policies that's what we expect! The crimes of this man just mount up to the Heavens, or should I say down to the other place? How dare he get away with this kind of retribution! I am just furious. I know I am a lowly citizen, but I don't expect a government agency to be allowed to be a hitman for a politician!

That is not surprising that Bubba Clinton would target the NRA and JW as Bubba is hostile towards Americans and the "idea" of freedom. Bubba is nothing more than a former U.S. citizen who denounced it to Moscow in the 60's.

To paraphrase Hume, if someone told me they saw a horse in a field in downstate Virginia, I would believe it as a matter of course; if someone told me they saw a zebra there, I would be skeptical and apply hard-nosed judgment about his reliability; if someone told me they saw a centaur there, I would reject the claim out of hand unless it was backed by far stronger evidence.

The notion that the Clinton Crime Cabal would sic the IRS on a vulnerable political opponenet falls squarely on the "horse" end of that spectrum.

Why would you say such a thing when you know that I did ping you to post 41. Oh, why can't we have transparency at Judicial Watch? I have been trying so hard to just get to the truth, but I am met at every turn with obfuscation and cover-up.

I know that there remain some minor questions to be resolved regarding the suicide. That is why we are still working together on this. Please, urge Judicial Watch to come forward with the information being requested so that we can leave no stone unturned.

It's all a huge "diversion" and cover-up. But only Judicial Watch can stop it! We just need to come clean with the American people. Judicial Watch should fully disclose all of its financial records. Trust the American people. They are very forgiving.

First of all, I do not take dictionary definitions very seriously--they show a lack of creativity on one's part. Second of all, I said before that I am not a beacon of Olympian Objectivity when it comes to Judicial Watch. Third of all, I may show favoritism towards them, but it is only because I appreciate their diligence and hard work. Fourth of all, I have no self-interest in Judicial Watch, so I don't know what you are talking about there; I do not even want to work for them when I get out of school, so my defense of them is not for extra brownie points or anything like that.

Howlin, my point is that the same standard should be applied to you. You have let your intense personal distaste for Klayman cloud your ability to see the good he has done and is currently doing.

They probably will not deny this, but they certainly make an exception for Judicial Watch. They have let their personal distaste for Judicial Watch and Larry Klayman cloud their ability to see the whole picture, especially in this situation.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.